On Sun, 8 Dec 1996, Bruce Perens wrote:
> I advised Joel to look over the licenses of the individual programs in
> non-free, and decide what he could legally include. I don't know if he'll
> have space.
Since there has been discussion of splitting up non-free, how about
creating a 'non-dist' for those that have distribution restrictions?
Fortunately, there are not many, and if the package maintainer would
include a line in the Packages entry like:
mypackage-1.1.deb D-Restrictions: CD foreign Xfoo
(restricted CD, foreign, or 'foo' distributions)
or
anotherpkg-0.1.deb D-Restrictions: none
(no restrictions on distribution)
This way, a grep of the packages (with standardized keywords) would give
an instant list of all packages not allowed on CD-ROM.
The '-Xfoo' flag is a hypothetical "extended" flag, here stating that
distribution by method "foo" is specifically prohibited, but there is no
recognized flag '-foo'.
This could be extended to all non-free packages, with other lines, like:
thispkg-2.0.deb U-Restrictions: commercial
for restrictions on commercial use.
Just an idea...
| This is OFFICIAL WRITTEN notification that I want to be REMOVED |
| from ALL commercial mailing lists. EVERY message sent from this |
| account has had this request posted. ALL UNSOLICITED ADVERTISEMENTS |
| SENT TO THIS ACCOUNT ARE IN VIOLATION OF FEDERAL (U.S.) LAW. |
--
This message was delayed because the list mail delivery agent was down.